RAJ KUMAR BAPNA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) THE petitioner challenges the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on February 17, 1997, in respect of the assessment year 1986-87. No reply has been filed after notice was issued to the respondents. However, the following facts are not disputed by learned counsel for the respondents that the original assessment under Section 143(3) for the assessment year 1986-87 was completed on March 27, 1987. In respect of the machines in question, a claim of the assessee for depreciation at 30 per cent. on the old machinery and his claim to investment allowance under Section 32A in respect of new machinery, namely, rig machines, was allowed.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has placed on record the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer which have been noted by the authorised representative of the assessee while inspecting the record of the case after notice was served on the assessee. The reasons recorded on January 27, 1997, which are in consonance with the plea taken by learned counsel for the respondents, read as under :